CNN, TMZ Commentators: Anyone Wearing a MAGA Hat Deserves to be Attacked

Marc Lamont Hill

In a Twitter exchange this week, CNN and TMZ commentators seemed to condone the attack on a Texas teenager because he wore a “Make America Great Again” hat, saying it represents racism and anyone wearing one deserved the trouble they were inviting.

The controversy began after TMZ host/commentator Van Lathan used Twitter to slam the teen wearing the hat, showing no sympathy for the situation because “your MAGA hat reads like a swastika to me.”

Lathan, you might remember, angrily confronted Kanye West in May over his support of President Trump. He said West had morphed into something that wasn’t real, implying he had betrayed his African American roots.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Silence is Consent updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

CNN commentator Marc Lamont Hill seemed to find the situation funny, as he responded to Lathan’s tweet with three laughing emojis.

Here are the tweets.

Here is Hill’s response, finding the situation funny.

Both then tried to distance themselves from the idea that they were endorsing the idea that that teen invited the attack, insisting they never said that. Of course, the implications were clear: they had little sympathy for anone wearing a MAGA hat, because they are inviting trouble.

They took offense that some would take their statements and extrapolate such an idea, although that is a tactic both like to use when parsing President Trump’s comments and forming radical opinions of them.

It’s hard to argue that Hill didn’t mean that the teen had it coming, after he tweeted this. He contradicts himself in one tweet, saying he doesn’t advocate violence against Trump supporters but then refusing to condemn it when it happens.

I guess it depends on what your definition of laughing is.

Hill again tried to convince everyone that he didn’t say what he just said, in a response to a Daily Caller article about his tweets.

Even Lathan didn’t own up to what he said, also denying the obvious. He also tried to deflect, saying Trump supporters don’t care when bad things happen.

Both Hill and Lathan refuse to see the obvious. Refusing to stand up to evil is condoning it. If anyone were to see a act of racism committed and refuse to condemn it in the strongest terms – or even throw laughing emojis at it – isn’t that endorsing it?

Post your thoughts in the comments section below on the tweets by Marc Lamont Hill and Van Lathan. In addition, share this on social media.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.